2016 NHL Draft

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

Why did i click on that?

This is why Flames fans don't like when someone says, "just Kidding."

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

1990

...and it ended up way worse than any time the Flames traded down.

Link

Darn, how could I have forgotten that one? Wasn't old enough to be a Flames fan then, but I do remember reading about it. It's ok Kidder, you're still tops in my books!

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by T@T

The 6th pick isn't stapled to Trelivings arse, If both Dubois and Tkachuk are gone I would be in favor of trading it.
Maybe something like this:

#6 and #35
......for
#13 and #21

or

#6 and #55
......for
#14 and #29

If BT trades down to acquire another second or a late first he should be fired, too much of a drop off this year and we already have a bunch of picks in the 2nd. You either pick at 6 or trade up somehow, trading down unless someone offers something very valuable should be off the table.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by T@T

The 6th pick isn't stapled to Trelivings arse, If both Dubois and Tkachuk are gone I would be in favor of trading it.
Maybe something like this:

#6 and #53
......for
#13 and #21

or

#6 and #55
......for
#14 and #29

Yeah but that's not likely to happen. I know it's slow this time of year and all for news but all this trade talk is fantasy. When's the last time a team in the Flames position traded out of the top 10? It just doesn't happen often and there's a reason for that.

[SuperMatt18]

If they could get #13 and #21 I wouldn't be too angry. IMO it depends on who the scouts like best and who they think is left at #13.

If the draft plays out as projected there is still a good player left at 13:

1)Matthews
2)Laine
3)Puljujarvi
4)Tkachuk
5)Dubois
6)Nylander
7)Juolevi
8)Chychrun
9)Brown
10)Sergachev
11)Keller
12)Macleod
13)Jost

Is 21st overall pick worth the difference between a Nylander or say one of Keller, Macleod, or Jost? Probably pretty close.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

If BT trades down to acquire another second or a late first he should be fired, too much of a drop off this year and we already have a bunch of picks in the 2nd. You either pick at 6 or trade up somehow, trading down unless someone offers something very valuable should be off the table.

Trading down one or two spots is acceptable, IMO. Given how close these players are, I'm not opposed to dropping to 8 and picking up more assets that might help us close out a goalie.

Trading down to the mid-1st is ludicrous. This isn't the NFL. Take the best top-10 prospect available and don't overthink it.

[Erick Estrada]

Someone remind me the last time the Flames made a pick between 20-30th overall that amounted to anything outside of Backlund? This is why you stay at 6th and take a player with higher odds of paying off.

[Rick M.]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

If they could get #13 and #21 I wouldn't be too angry. IMO it depends on who the scouts like best and who they think is left at #13.

If the draft plays out as projected there is still a good player left at 13:

1)Matthews
2)Laine
3)Puljujarvi
4)Tkachuk
5)Dubois
6)Nylander
7)Juolevi
8)Chychrun
9)Brown
10)Sergachev
11)Keller
12)Macleod
13)Jost

Is 21st overall pick worth the difference between a Nylander or say one of Keller, Macleod, or Jost? Probably pretty close.

If the guys you lose out on by trading down become stars, you look like idiots.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Someone remind me the last time the Flames made a pick between 20-30th overall that amounted to anything outside of Backlund? This is why you stay at 6th and take a player with higher odds of paying off.

Jankowski. Wait for it.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Someone remind me the last time the Flames made a pick between 20-30th overall that amounted to anything outside of Backlund? This is why you stay at 6th and take a player with higher odds of paying off.

Yes please.

There's a reason why players are ranked in the top 10 and outside of the top 20. It's cause they're more likely to be successful.

We no longer have the luxury of writing off seasons as rebuilds. It's been 4 years now and if we want to be competitive we NEED this pick to pan out into a roster player that fills one of our major holes, whether that be through trade or through actually picking a player. What this team can't do is sit around and hope a project player turns out in a few years.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Jankowski. Wait for it.

I lump him in with Piorier in that he still has potential but hasn't amounted to anything yet and even if they do neither are looking like they will be major difference makers in the NHL. So far we have a 3rd line center in Backlund to show for a lot of players taken between 20 - 30 over the past decade with essentially the same head of scouting. Not exactly something to be overly confident about trading down out of the top 10.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Yeah but that's not likely to happen. I know it's slow this time of year and all for news but all this trade talk is fantasy. When's the last time a team in the Flames position traded out of the top 10? It just doesn't happen often and there's a reason for that.

When was the last time the draft was this up in the air? After the first three it's the wild west. Player rankings are changing each day. This draft is a complete wildcard. You may get the best player, outside of the top three, at 12 just as easily as at 4. Depending on what you like, you might get your player at 20. This is a crapshoot more than usual.

Originally Posted by Rick M.

If the guys you lose out on by trading down become stars, you look like idiots.

And if the guy up in your slot busts you look like a freaking genius. If the guy you pick later turns out to be a player, or the better player, you're legendary. What's your point?

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by New Era

When was the last time the draft was this up in the air? After the first three it's the wild west. Player rankings are changing each day. This draft is a complete wildcard. You may get the best player, outside of the top three, at 12 just as easily as at 4. Depending on what you like, you might get your player at 20. This is a crapshoot more than usual.

I don't know. Every year maybe? It's really only the three defensemen where opinions seem to vary wildly but all three of them are likely to be picked by 13. I don't consider this draft much different than any other really outside of the fact there isn't a consensus top 5 defenseman. Things always are a crapshoot once you get into the teens. Nothing new there.

[Caged Great]

The most I'd be comfortable trading down to is 9th maybe 10th and that is if we hit the 6th overall pick and there are 3-4 guys that they have rated the same on their list. Might as well trade down in that scenario because you'll still get one that you rated highly.

It is one of the perks having the first pick of the second tier. Either a first tier guy falls down to you, in which you thank the team above you that screwed up, or you have the availability to move down to get additional assets. Everyone from 6-14 is pretty much equal. Between Nylander, Brown, Chychrun, Sergachev, Juolevi, Jost, Keller, Bean and McAvoy, there is not a ton to separate them. McAvoy for example, who is on the bottom of the list of the top 5 D-men had the same offensive season that Noah Hanifin did in the NCAA last year. The only difference between them is McAvoy is 6-0 where Hanifin is 6-3. There isn't much to separate any of Nylander/Jost/Keller in terms of raw skill, with the only difference being that the latter two as slightly shorter than Nylander. It all just depends on what the team wants to do and what is available to them.

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

1990

...and it ended up way worse than any time the Flames traded down.

Link

The thing is that you'd have to evaluate Trevor Kidd independently without considering Martin Brodeour as part of the equation.

Kidd actually was a starter for 3 ish years and was a key piece in a deal to get J.S. Giguere. So what was a player like that worth?

Had the Flames stayed put at 21, we don't know what would have happened. What we do know is that the Flames moved up to take Kidd, and was Kidd a good enough player that you could say was worth moving into the 11th spot in the draft to pick?

The likely answer in this case is no...but I think that's the sort of thing that analytics types would be looking to evaluate here.

[MRCboicgy]

On a side note - still can't believe Peter Bondra wasn't taken till the 8th round that year. That worked out well for the Caps.

[icarus]

Since people sometimes pointlessly share things they have dreamt about the draft, here's mine: I dreamt the Flames traded down with Montreal and ended up with Logan Brown. Also, the Rangers ended up with Nylander somehow--don't ask me how, my dream didn't go into that level of detail before I started riding a dragon through a rainforest.

[driveway]

Based on the news today about the expansion draft and teams needing to protect players with NMC's I feel like there is a bit more of an opening for a move up to #3.

If expansion happens in 2017 Columbus will have to protect Dubisnky, Hartnell, Foligno, Clarkson and Tyutin. That eats up four of their forward spots. Packaging one of those players with #3 and moving down might be a good opportunity for them to give themselves a little more flexibility.

Would we be open to taking 3 + Clarkson for 6 + 53 + Prospect? Would Columbus be open to that?

[Ashasx]

.... and then we have to protect Clarkson.

[Karl]

Originally Posted by driveway

Based on the news today about the expansion draft and teams needing to protect players with NMC's I feel like there is a bit more of an opening for a move up to #3.

If expansion happens in 2017 Columbus will have to protect Dubisnky, Hartnell, Foligno, Clarkson and Tyutin. That eats up four of their forward spots. Packaging one of those players with #3 and moving down might be a good opportunity for them to give themselves a little more flexibility.

Would we be open to taking 3 + Clarkson for 6 + 53 + Prospect? Would Columbus be open to that?

I wouldn't because....

Originally Posted by Ashasx

....then we have to protect Clarkson.

this probably. Unless somehow Clarkson can be convinced to waive his NMC.